SURYA BAI Vs. JAGADISWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition by the tenant is directed against the order of the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, confirming the ordtr of eviction passed by the Rent Controller, Secunderabad.

(2.) For convenience, the parties are referred to as they stood in the Court of the first instance. The premises bearing No. 7-1-606/1 situated at Sactiion Road, Secunderabad, originally belonged to one Dundoo Pentaiah. The respondent was tenant in occupation of the entire first floor since more than 20 years. The ground floor of the premises is said to consist of mulgies meant for non residential purposes. The petitioner was carrying on business in one of the mulgies on the ground floor. He was residing in 2 rested premises in Ranigunj Secunderabad. The petitioner in view of the long distance between his residence and the place of business was said to be experiencing some inconvenience. On the death of the said Pentaiah, the premises has come to be divided between four share holders. A pan of the upstairs portion consisting of one room used as kitchen and a W.C bathroom fell to the share of Dundoo Rajeshwari. The respondent was paying the rent for the whole upstairs portion in four respective shares. The petitioner being an occupant of one of the mulgies on the groundfloor purchased from the said Rajeswari the above portion that fell to her share. He thus issued a notice to the respondent to vacate the premises on the ground of his personal requirement.

(3.) The petition was resisted by the respondent on the ground that the requirement of the petitioner was not a bonafide one. The contention was that for the portion purchased by the petitioner there is no independent staircase available And that the present stair case which is being used by the respondent to reach the other first floor portion is not available to the petitioner. The other contention is that even if a new stair case opening in to the one and the only room would be constructed by the peti'ioner, that accommodation itself would not be sufficient. Thus, on the ground of want of sufficiently of accommodation, it was urged that the requirement is not a bonafide one.